SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA—MPAA CEO Chris Dodd didn't seem eager to talk about the aftermath of SOPA when he spoke at San Francisco's Commonwealth Club on Tuesday night. The former Connecticut senator would have preferred to wax poetic about innovation, California, and the collaboration between Hollywood and Silicon Valley. "Every studio I deal with has a distribution agreement with Google," said Dodd. "We've divided up this discussion in a way that doesn't really get us moving along as a people."

He couldn't ignore it for long. Gavin Newsom brought it up only briefly, but reporters approached Dodd after the event to get more details on how he viewed the SOPA aftermath, as well as the MPAA's Internet lobbying more generally. SOPA and its sister bill PIPA were both definitively killed off earlier this year after an overwhelming campaign of online action by citizens and tech companies.

Dodd sounded chastened, with a tone that was a far cry from the rhetoric the MPAA was putting out in January. "When SOPA-PIPA blew up, it was a transformative event," said Dodd. "There were eight million e-mails [to elected representatives] in two days." That caused senators to run away from the legislation. "People were dropping their names as co-sponsors within minutes, not hours," he said.

"These bills are dead, they're not coming back," said Dodd. "And they shouldn't." He said the MPAA isn't focused on getting similar legislation passed in the future, at the moment. "I think we're better served by sitting down [with the tech sector and SOPA opponents] and seeing what we agree on."

Still, Dodd did say that some of the reaction to SOPA and PIPA was "over the top"—specifically, the allegations of censorship, implied by the black bar over Google search logo or the complete shutdown of Wikipedia. "DNS filtering goes on every day on the Internet," said Dodd. "Obviously it needs to be done very carefully. But five million pages were taken off Google last year [for IP violations]. To Google's great credit, it recently changed its algorithm to a point where, when there are enough complaints about a site, it moves that site down on their page—which I applaud."

Dodd also continued to laud the "six strikes" plan that US Internet providers have agreed to enforce on behalf of the entertainment industry, insisting that it's an "educational" program aimed at illegal downloads. "If people are aware they're downloading illegal content, they'll go to a legal service," he said. "It's an experiment to see if we can get cooperation. It's not a law—you don't go to jail."

The MPAA won't have any kind of back-door to subscriber records at Verizon or other ISPs, Dodd said.

After the event, an EFF attorney in the audience asked, "Why wasn't that spirit of cooperation in the room when SOPA was drafted?"

"I don't know," answered Dodd. "There was no widespread conversation." Dodd seemed to think SOPA just wasn't seen as particularly controversial when it was first introduced, with nearly half the Senate listed as co-sponsors. "Going after foreign, rogue sites was not seen as an illegitimate idea," he noted. The bill may have been seen as an easy vote, until stiff resistance was seen in January.

What he means is that the specific bills SOPA and PIPA are dead. But that means nothing for any new bills that they come up with (somebody needs to think of the children, you know), so we have to remain vigilant.

One must very carefully parse everything one sees or hears on the 'approved' news media these days. More often than not things are not what they seem, and it only becomes clear after some time in what direction they are about to be taken. Often we are confronted with seemingly diametrically opposed opinions on how to tackle a burning problem. Later a 'compromise' will suddenly and 'unexpectedly' make its entrance, consisting of the very policies the elites wanted to introduce in the first place. Upon hearing of the 'compromise', everybody nods sagely and agrees that this is what should be done, not realizing that they were duped from the very beginning.

"These bills are dead, they're not coming back," said Dodd. "And they shouldn't." He said the MPAA isn't focused on getting similar legislation passed in the future, at the moment.

Maybe not 'at the moment'. But I'm sure they'll be back in a more hidden fashion or as a rider on some other bill.

Exactly !!! And Chris Dodd you are a real piece of SHIT.And so is your MAFIAA Fuckwad Industry.Sorry me Bad English Curse Words but I do have a real Hate for the large Big Content Industries and a Big Hate for Chris Dodd.

And yes we will be sold out by our Government and this will be back again.

Propaganda move - they want everyone to sit back and get comfy and relax. Maybe they hope we will all get distracted by some shiny red ball elsewhere and then they will try to slip their agenda into another bill or series of bills as quietly as possible. All they're doing is reforming their strategy. Surely they must be trying to call a bluff on the hivemind that is the Internet - and when they do it will be just as important for us all to show our solidarity and unity in preventing this oppressive crappy legislation from ever being passed.

Even after they lost this round, the MPAA still has no clue as to why. Half the senators backed the bills originally??? They have no clue either (or don't care) what their constituents want.

"Why wasn't that spirit of cooperation in the room when SOPA was drafted?" Because these ~!@#$% want everything! Compromise is just losing for them. I can't wait until the movie industry and music industry in the USA fails completely. It is so corrupt it is only a matter of time. Whatever takes its place has to be better.

One must very carefully parse everything one sees or hears on the 'approved' news media these days. More often than not things are not what they seem, and it only becomes clear after some time in what direction they are about to be taken. Often we are confronted with seemingly diametrically opposed opinions on how to tackle a burning problem. Later a 'compromise' will suddenly and 'unexpectedly' make its entrance, consisting of the very policies the elites wanted to introduce in the first place. Upon hearing of the 'compromise', everybody nods sagely and agrees that this is what should be done, not realizing that they were duped from the very beginning.

Civil violations are still legal violations that incur no jail time. That's not how the definition of a law works. If companies are required to revoke a customer's internet access after 6 incidents of copyright infringement then that's still a law. He's right in that if it's voluntary then it's not but that hardly changes things from the consumer's perspective when they are stuck without internet. If anything it's worse because they may be denied internet access on the basis of copyright infringement without ever having a chance to defend themselves of the charges in court.

Quote:

If people are aware they're downloading illegal content, they'll go to a legal service

There ARE no (or very few) legal services. A legal service offering online television or movie content would BLOW the (illegitimate) competition out of the water. There would be no competing with the media companies' ability to offer higher quality, better selection, and the giant fact that there is no ad revenue being funnelled to some quasi-legit website admin who has no right to profit off said content.

Sadly, what we see instead is a stubborn refusal to acknowledge where media content delivery is headed. I mean the CEO of HBO stated they would not be offering a standalone online service because internet based television is "A FAD" (my caps). (http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/20 ... es-piracy/). Its like what happened with VHS all over again.

The idea of a central bank was strongly avoided, dissuaded, and fought against in the United States for a long time. But, we eventually got The Fed. Folks in power know how to bide their time, and know how to repaint a turd to look appealing every time they send it around again.

So my ISP will cut me off, but they won't be legally obligated to do so? Gee, I feel so much better now.

I doubt they ever would. Unless there is some sort of bounty system in place where the MPAA pays for the revenue they'd lose by cutting of a subscriber. (or a we see your disconnected but for only $10 more than you are paying now a month we will reconnect you with no strikes to your name) These people are all just in it for the money, it honestly isn't anything personal. So though they may seem to hate their customers someone is crunching the numbers and coming up wit the idea they make more this way.

Sadly, what we see instead is a stubborn refusal to acknowledge where media content delivery is headed. I mean the CEO of HBO stated they would not be offering a standalone online service because internet based television is "A FAD" (my caps). (http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/20 ... es-piracy/). Its like what happened with VHS all over again.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Oh man, that is awesome in all the wrong ways. Sir, you just made my day. The comedy of life never stops.

Dodd also continued to laud the "six strikes" plan that US Internet providers have agreed to enforce on behalf of the entertainment industry, insisting that it's an "educational" program aimed at illegal downloads. "If people are aware they're downloading illegal content, they'll go to a legal service," he said. "It's an experiment to see if we can get cooperation. It's not a law—you don't go to jail."

We would go to a legal service if one was available. This legal service should provide good service, timely goods and a reasonable price. Since none of your service provide these this is not going to happen.

Hey, Chris. I'm more interested in hearing about your sweetheart mortgages with lenders that had business before the Senate Banking Committee you chaired and how you ignored evidence of illegal and immoral activity by these firms. I'd also like to hear from your friend Barney Frank.

I'd also like to know why you accepted $13M in campaign contributions from finance, insurance of real estate interests since 1989. I'd be especially interested in your views of what you think they were getting out of that "investment".

Maybe the answers to these questions would shed light on how you got to be MPAA CEO. While I don't subscribe to the genetic fallacy, I think you need to build some credibility before anyone should bother wasting time listening to what you have to say on any subject. Come clean first--then we'll talk.

One must very carefully parse everything one sees or hears on the 'approved' news media these days. More often than not things are not what they seem, and it only becomes clear after some time in what direction they are about to be taken. Often we are confronted with seemingly diametrically opposed opinions on how to tackle a burning problem. Later a 'compromise' will suddenly and 'unexpectedly' make its entrance, consisting of the very policies the elites wanted to introduce in the first place. Upon hearing of the 'compromise', everybody nods sagely and agrees that this is what should be done, not realizing that they were duped from the very beginning.

Pater Tenebrarum, The Acting Man blog.

Fixed. Always attribute quotes from others.

True, i was trying to avoid "What does this have to do with this" reply that is so common from people who cant understand the big picture.http://www.acting-man.com/?p=19797

It's easier, higher-quality, and more readily accessible. Even with the better options (e.g. Amazon VOD), shows are often $3/ep for semi-current episodes. You can get the DVD sets on release for about 2/3 that, or wait a while and get 'em for about a buck an ep. Of course, then you're a year behind. Or you can torrent, get them within hours (at most) of being broadcast, in good quality.

Put the shows up, in good time, for $1.50 an ep in an open format, and watch domestic utilization of third-party sources disappear within weeks. Drop to $1 per ep after a few weeks, or at the end of the season.

SOPA and PIPA are dead, and so are Demonoid, Library.nu, and Megaupload. The MPAA doesn't need to incur the wrath of the American public because they're doing a good job of shutting down sites overseas.

Yes let's all continue to be vigilant about copyright. Meanwhile, a court just gave President Obama the power to indefinitely detain anyone he wants anywhere, for "sympathising" or "providing support" for "the enemy", whoever he determines that to be. No courts required. He can just basically disappear whoever he wants anywhere on the planet in total secrecy. In fact, because Obama fought for this power, now every President from here until the inevitable demise of the republic will also have this power with no court oversight. But let's just all look away on that issue. The important thing right now is copyright, so let's just all lay low and wait for something to happen on that front.

It's easier, higher-quality, and more readily accessible. Even with the better options (e.g. Amazon VOD), shows are often $3/ep for semi-current episodes. You can get the DVD sets on release for about 2/3 that, or wait a while and get 'em for about a buck an ep. Of course, then you're a year behind. Or you can torrent, get them within hours (at most) of being broadcast, in good quality.

Put the shows up, in good time, for $1.50 an ep in an open format, and watch domestic utilization of third-party sources disappear within weeks. Drop to $1 per ep after a few weeks, or at the end of the season.

Yes let's all continue to be vigilant about copyright. Meanwhile, a court just gave President Obama the power to indefinitely detain anyone he wants anywhere, for "sympathising" or "providing support" for "the enemy", whoever he determines that to be. No courts required. He can just basically disappear whoever he wants anywhere on the planet in total secrecy. In fact, because Obama fought for this power, now every President from here until the inevitable demise of the republic will also have this power with no court oversight. But let's just all look away on that issue. The important thing right now is copyright, so let's just all lay low and wait for something to happen on that front.

Man, don't come to a tech site with this crap. If I wanted to hear a political rant about presidential powers that have no basis in technology, I'd got to any number of extremist blogs or new sites. If you don't want to talk about the issues at hand, go to a more willing audience.

Don't get me wrong, I'm plenty worried about the creeping extrajudicial powers of the executive branch. I just don't know what the fuck that's got to do with a story about copyright.

You can "lol first world problems" away any post you like. Did you notice what website you are currently on? It's a tech news site. The vast majority of posts here are about things that are less important, in the grand scheme of things, than the erosion of American civil liberties.

Here is a short list of other sites that do not primarily concern themselves with stories about the Obama Administration's overreach on due process:

I think industry agreements like this 6 strikes policy should be illegal. I don't see how this is not anti-competitive collusion and I would rather deal with a law, which provides recourse in a court to a scheme cooked up by corporations in which the consumer has no rights what so ever.

Congrats Ars, way to parrot and not think critically. You're on par with The New York Times now. SOPA and PIPA, the bills may be dead, but ACTA and TPP are still going, going strong for TPP, which is easily worse than SOPA/PIPA.